|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: WPS tokenizerRe: WPS tokenizer
From: XavierGr <xaviergr_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:53:19 +0200 On 18/03/07, RaeNye <raenye_at_netvision.net.il> wrote: > > >So I'm finally ready to present a patch for the WPS tokenizer. > >The basic idea is to store the WPS as an array of tokens. > > >Please tell me what you think of the concept and the code. > >IMHO this has the advantage of being much clearer, readable and > maintainable than the current code. > >As of performance, I don't have the confirmation that it's faster, but I > think it should be, as it was designed > >to make the parser do all the work. Binsize isa bit of a disappointment. > I > thought it could be smaller, > >but instead I'm seeing a (small) increase on some targets (I haven't done > much checking, though). > > I haven't yet looked at the code, but I think we could parse the WPS in a > preprocessor plugin > (don't call it a WPS compiler, it sounds intimidating), creating some > "bytecode" that would be interpreted by the WPS viewer > (really don't call it a WPS-VM, that's just sick). > > We can surely save core size as well as CPU cycles. > All this can be made in a user-transparent way by having the preprocessing > done by a viewer plugin, caching the result with a WPS timestamp/filehash > to > save future work. > > The real question is whether we can come up with a platform independent > intermediate representation that captures all current (and hopefully > future > WPS aspects). > > My 2 cents, > R. I don't know exactly the details of your proposal, but I wouldn't like to see core features of Rockbox (like the WPS) downgraded to plugins. What about TSR plugins that run in the background? Received on 2007-03-18 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |